FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Philosophy & Religious Studies > History of Abrahamic Religions & Related Texts
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 01:23 AM

Notices

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-20-2013, 08:14 AM   #11
aa5874
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default

In order to get a fundamental understanding of the history of Christianity one must first get familiar with writings of antiquity.

This is a partial list of writings that MUST be read.

Philo, Plutarch, Josephus, Tacitus, Suetonius, Pliny, Lucian, Cassius Dio, Jullian the Emperor, Aristides, Justin Martyr, Theophilus of Antioch, Athenagoras of Athens, Minucius Felix, Arnobius, Lactantius, the Canonised NT, Ignatius, Clement of Rome, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, Hippolytus, Origen, Eusebius, Jerome, Chrysostom, Ephraim the Syrian, Augustine of Hippo, Optatus, Rufinus and others.
aa5874 is offline  
Old 09-20-2013, 08:28 AM   #12
Tommy
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tasmania
Posts: 383
Default

Ehrman is a wizard of a man, if indeed he may be called a man.

Very good youtube lectures on the NT.
Tommy is offline  
Old 09-20-2013, 12:53 PM   #13
DCHindley
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Mondcivitan Republic
Posts: 2,550
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tommy View Post
Ehrman is a wizard of a man, if indeed he may be called a man.

Very good youtube lectures on the NT.
The once popular reconstruction of Robert Eisler applied to the now popular Ehrman.
Now about this time arose (an occasion for new disturbances) a certain Ehrman, a wizard of a man, if indeed he may be called a man (who was the most monstrous of all men, whom his disciples call a son of gun, as having made men wonder what no man hath ever yet wondered). . . . He was in fact a Professer of astonishing tricks to such men as accept the abnormal with delight. And he seduced many Jews and many also of the Western world, and (was regarded by them as) the Messiah [advocate]. And when, on the indictment of the principal men among us, Mythicists had sentenced him to the cross, still those who before had admired him did not cease (to rave). For it seemed to them that having [once believed] Jesus been dead for three days, as the divinely-inspired prophets had foretold — these and ten thousand other wonderful things — concerning him, [Ehrman] had [re-]appeared to them alive again [as an agnostic]. Yet even now the race of those who are called 'Christians' is not extinct [on account of] him.
DCH
DCHindley is offline  
Old 09-20-2013, 12:54 PM   #14
outhouse
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Auburn ca
Posts: 4,269
Default

Ive enjoyed his work.

I find no real fault other then the over attributation of some historical elements.


I find this in most scholars work so its not perosnal to his alone.
outhouse is offline  
Old 09-20-2013, 02:03 PM   #15
Adam
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Dixon CA
Posts: 1,150
Default

Don't trust Ehrman for honest statements on video debates. To argue against Christians like Dan Wallace and Craig Evans, he's willing to sound like a Mythicist. In contrast in promoting his recent Did Jesus Exist he goes over to the other extreme of acknowledging written sources in the 30's, within a decade of Jesus. By the latter his position seemed almost like mine in Gospel Eyewitnesses in which I present seven written eyewitness records to Jesus, but more likely he is referring to the very early dating from James Crossley and Maurice Casey.
So he knows very well that there is very strong evidence of the historicity of Jesus, but to make debate points he'll deny things he knows to be true.
Adam is offline  
Old 09-20-2013, 02:09 PM   #16
Minimalist
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,808
Default

He knows textual criticism backwards and forwards and his trashing of the various components of the NT is a tremendous advance for rationality.

When he starts on the faith crap, he is no more credible than anyone else.
Minimalist is offline  
Old 09-20-2013, 02:42 PM   #17
NobleSavage
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 127.0.0.1
Posts: 1,363
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
In order to get a fundamental understanding of the history of Christianity one must first get familiar with writings of antiquity.

This is a partial list of writings that MUST be read.

Philo, Plutarch, Josephus, Tacitus, Suetonius, Pliny, Lucian, Cassius Dio, Jullian the Emperor, Aristides, Justin Martyr, Theophilus of Antioch, Athenagoras of Athens, Minucius Felix, Arnobius, Lactantius, the Canonised NT, Ignatius, Clement of Rome, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, Hippolytus, Origen, Eusebius, Jerome, Chrysostom, Ephraim the Syrian, Augustine of Hippo, Optatus, Rufinus and others.
I'm have no interest in reading all that. I not looking to become a biblical scholar. I just want to know a little more than nothing. If it piques my interest I'll read more.
NobleSavage is offline  
Old 09-20-2013, 03:26 PM   #18
stephan huller
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: seattle, wa
Posts: 9,337
Default

Quote:
However, I no longer regard him as a scholar.
Well, once you've given in to the logic of Pete Brown it is hard to find anything else that compares.
stephan huller is offline  
Old 09-22-2013, 10:46 AM   #19
Solo
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 2,579
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by NobleSavage View Post

There is a radio interview on Youtube where Ehrman responds to Carrier.

Again, I do not think that Bart Ehrman is credible. Some of his claims in the interview are highly questionable.

Bart Ehrman claims "I thought everyone knew Jesus existed".

Any serious scholar knows that the existence of Jesus of Nazareth has been questioned and that there is an ON-GOING Quest, an ON-GOING search, for an HJ by Scholars for over 200 years since it was admitted that the Jesus of the Bible is a Jesus of Faith [a Jesus of Myth].
AFAICT, Ehrman is completely innocent of the intellectual history of Europe in the age of Enlightment and after. He has no clue where and how the idea that Jesus did not exist arose, how and by whom it was propagated, and how far it penetrated the popular consciousness. In most of Western Europe (perhaps outside of Britain), as far as I can tell, the "mythicist" numbers would be far greater and better articulated than in North America. Ehrman just simply does not grasp essential points. He puts too much emphasis on his personal experiences with the mental horizons of his undergraduate audience and their grasp of the subject. He extrapolates from that and finds the "mythical" theory arises from a need to spread uninformed propaganda. It is interesting to observe his essentially "fundamentalist" view of Paul meeting James, the brother of the Lord, and believing that the title meant Paul interacted with Jesus blood relative.

After additional reading on the late second-temple Jewish worship I find it even harder to imagine that James was anything but a "strict monotheist" (in the sense that Larry Hurtado uses the term) who could accept a title that had "Lord" in it with that refered to a worship figure other than Yahweh. It's strange that Ehrman would have missed something like that, given that Origen [CC 1:47] apparently did not.

Best,
Jiri
Solo is offline  
Old 09-22-2013, 04:43 PM   #20
ApostateAbe
Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: MT
Posts: 10,656
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NobleSavage View Post
I know next to nothing about the history of Christianity. I've see all of Ehrman's lectures on youtube and I like them. I'm thinking about getting some of his books. So I'm wondering what kind of reputation he has in these parts. I'm trying to tip toe into learning more about christian history and I thought Ehrman would be a good place to start.
He has written a lot of great books, and I have read a handful of them. The book I recommend most is The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings (or via: amazon.co.uk), which is his textbook for his introductory undergraduate course on the New Testament. It provides the background knowledge necessary for beginning to evaluate the very many arguments and positions of the subject. Almost all of the arguments and positions are absurd, but you may not know it without the sort of knowledge commonly known among scholars and students in the field (not that you should simply trust Ehrman). His book on mythicism is not his best. However, it is the best book with a focus on the criticism of the vast quantity of mythicist literature, and the objections to the book by mythicists are largely overblown.
ApostateAbe is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:36 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.